The "thousands more police officers" comes with a caveat. Federal funding runs out after a few years, leaving state and local governments on the hook for the salaries and benefits of the newly hired cops.
My point is that the left is not defunding the police or weak on crime compared to the other side.
The "thousands more police officers" comes with a caveat. Federal funding runs out after a few years, leaving state and local governments on the hook for the salaries and benefits of the newly hired cops.
My point is that the left is not defunding the police or weak on crime compared to the other side.
The left most certainly is weak on crime. Liberals believe that people are basically good, and that any criminal or antisocial activity takes place is the result of systemic oppression of the racial, gender, or sexual variety. Therefore no one can really be held accountable for their actions, provided that their criminal behavior can be linked in someway to one of these oppressive states.
Thus we get Defund the Police, because the police (the oppressive system) must be responsible for criminal behavior. This results in less police, and less patrolling of high crime areas. Which results in more death and mayhem. So the left is partially responsible for the chaos in which many of our high crime areas exist.
What you're calling leftist "radicalization" is what is known in history as the modern "rights revolution", which dates to at least to the Enlightenment, and is responsible in part for the birth of the country in which you live.
Individual freedom, bodily autonomy, etc. are inevitable outcomes of this logic; they don't need to be "promoted" or "espoused" by political parties; they just happen, when individuals are treated equally and fairly. Trying to oppose or roll them back is, in any modern context, the radical (though not progressive) move. And that way lies a conflict which will end with the common ruin of the contending parties, or else victory in for the march of individual rights. There is no history for conservative reaction. It must fail, or else society as we know it will fail.
My point is that the left is not defunding the police or weak on crime compared to the other side.
The left most certainly is weak on crime. Liberals believe that people are basically good, and that any criminal or antisocial activity takes place is the result of systemic oppression of the racial, gender, or sexual variety. Therefore no one can really be held accountable for their actions, provided that their criminal behavior can be linked in someway to one of these oppressive states.
Thus we get Defund the Police, because the police (the oppressive system) must be responsible for criminal behavior. This results in less police, and less patrolling of high crime areas. Which results in more death and mayhem. So the left is partially responsible for the chaos in which many of our high crime areas exist.
And the conservative solution is?
The US already has more people in jail per capita than any other place on earth, so that can't be it.
American society is in collapse. That's why you have intractable crime. The solution is to reverse this collapse.
The hoary old "tough" vs "soft" on crime and criminals is entirely the wrong set of propositions.
What American reactionaries are calling a "leftist" program for the country is, in historical and international comparative perspective, really just a modernization project. What they oppose, with dire consequences for everyone, is modernity itself.
My point is that the left is not defunding the police or weak on crime compared to the other side.
The left most certainly is weak on crime. Liberals believe that people are basically good, and that any criminal or antisocial activity takes place is the result of systemic oppression of the racial, gender, or sexual variety. Therefore no one can really be held accountable for their actions, provided that their criminal behavior can be linked in someway to one of these oppressive states.
Ridiculous. Republicans are weak on crime because they don’t support basic gun safety regulation. They’d rather criminals and the mentally unstable have easy access to guns all in the name of the Second Amendment and having their campaigns funded by the NRA. If you’re ok with having more mass shootings in schools, malls, movie theaters, and places of worship, vote Republican. If you want basic gun safety regulation, vote Democrat.
My point is that the left is not defunding the police or weak on crime compared to the other side.
The left most certainly is weak on crime. Liberals believe that people are basically good, and that any criminal or antisocial activity takes place is the result of systemic oppression of the racial, gender, or sexual variety. Therefore no one can really be held accountable for their actions, provided that their criminal behavior can be linked in someway to one of these oppressive states.
Thus we get Defund the Police, because the police (the oppressive system) must be responsible for criminal behavior. This results in less police, and less patrolling of high crime areas. Which results in more death and mayhem. So the left is partially responsible for the chaos in which many of our high crime areas exist.
Spending 37 billion on crime is defunding the police? I don't understand your logic.
You are referring to the woke fringe left. They are as wacky as Q anon fringe right.
Yes the left is partially responsible. As is the war on drugs.
$13 billion (over five years) to hire/train an added 100,000 cops nationwide. $3 billion for local courts to clear backlogged cases, especially involving murders and guns. $15 billion for a grant program funding “ideas” for preventing violent crime or creating “public-health responses” to nonviolent incidents, all in the name of reducing burdens on law enforcement. $5 billion to aid “violence prevention” programs.
Again, where is the defunding the police? So the results aren't instant and fast enough for you so they must be weak on crime. Then when money is spent, people complaint that money is being wasted.
Prevention is very valid as is public health responses because a lot of crime is rooted in mental illness. This is why there is a growing movement of co-responders who are mental health clinicians who ride with police to address mental health crisis so police can focus on the real crime and not waste their resources trying to treat mental health issues which is not their job.
Calling Biden's (or the main body of the Democratic Party) "far left" is laughable. Compared to most liberal / progressive parties in the civilized world, the USA's Dem party is centrist.
Sullivan's solution to the fascist uprising on the right is to cut off our face to spite our nose.
I wouldn’t call Sullivan left or right, he’s an independent thinker and would probably prefer to not be put into a box. That said, he is wrong to categorize the Dems as far left. I would argue they’ve done a poor job articulating why people should vote for them but calling them far left is sloppy journalism and amounts to bothsiderism.
The Republican platform is entirely fear-based at this point. If you vote for Democrats:
- They are coming for your guns
- They are coming for your church
- They're going to let all the criminals run free after they take your gun
- Their buddies the illegals are coming for your job and your daughter
- Speaking your daughter, the Dems want to make her into a transgender or force her to use the men's bathroom
- re: your daughter, btw, we're taking away her reproductive freedoms.
...etc...
The only solution? Tax cuts!
How the hell do people fall for this garbage? I yearn for the days when we had an actual functional Republican party that had real ideas and intended to try and pass meaningful legislation.
How is it fear based if it is true?
illegal immigration statistics are real.
transgender ideology doesn’t simply exist on twitter. It is being pushed on little kids programs across the country. We could simply point to the data of number of drag time story hours per year and see there has been a spike in the last 4 years.
crime is up in cities. Again, this is 100% corroborated by data.
What you're calling leftist "radicalization" is what is known in history as the modern "rights revolution", which dates to at least to the Enlightenment, and is responsible in part for the birth of the country in which you live.
Individual freedom, bodily autonomy, etc. are inevitable outcomes of this logic; they don't need to be "promoted" or "espoused" by political parties; they just happen, when individuals are treated equally and fairly. Trying to oppose or roll them back is, in any modern context, the radical (though not progressive) move. And that way lies a conflict which will end with the common ruin of the contending parties, or else victory in for the march of individual rights. There is no history for conservative reaction. It must fail, or else society as we know it will fail.
I don’t see transgenderism, gay marriage, abortion at will, transition surgeries for minors, etc to be an inevitable advancement of progress human liberty. I think individual rights are gifts from God. The things we are obsessed about today are just childish bleating to get what we want, right now. We want to fill a hole inside us that politics can’t fill. That’s nothing g to do with liberty, and everything to do with license.
What you're calling leftist "radicalization" is what is known in history as the modern "rights revolution", which dates to at least to the Enlightenment, and is responsible in part for the birth of the country in which you live.
Individual freedom, bodily autonomy, etc. are inevitable outcomes of this logic; they don't need to be "promoted" or "espoused" by political parties; they just happen, when individuals are treated equally and fairly. Trying to oppose or roll them back is, in any modern context, the radical (though not progressive) move. And that way lies a conflict which will end with the common ruin of the contending parties, or else victory in for the march of individual rights. There is no history for conservative reaction. It must fail, or else society as we know it will fail.
I don’t see transgenderism, gay marriage, abortion at will, transition surgeries for minors, etc to be an inevitable advancement of progress human liberty. I think individual rights are gifts from God. The things we are obsessed about today are just childish bleating to get what we want, right now. We want to fill a hole inside us that politics can’t fill. That’s nothing g to do with liberty, and everything to do with license.
Expecting everybody run the country according to your belief in your particular mythological being isn't exactly progress.
The further we get from our theocratic past, the better off society has been.
You're free to have your beliefs. You're not free to impose your religion on others, and you should expect the government to do that for you.
If you don't believe gay marriage is moral, don't marry someone of the same sex.
If you think abortion is a sin, don't have an abortion.
But stop thinking it's your duty and right to impose your chosen mythology on others.
I have a novel idea - how about the site owners and moderators, for that matter, stay the hell out of political discussions and try to create an appearance of impartiality? Even if it is a bold-faced lie.
Sorry if this has been said already, but I refuse to read this thread for that very reason.
And this should be so obvious, it is self-evident. It is simply embarrassing that it doesn't seem to be getting across
When the GOP take the house and senate on Tuesday - which they will in a landslide. Biden should do the right and moral thing by resigning to let Trump take over (it was his right in the first place, since the election was stolen).Since he won't officially have been elected he should forego the two year limit and stay at the helm for as long as is needed (maybe the rest of his life). This the will of real american people - not fake americans (Dem's etc.).
What you're calling leftist "radicalization" is what is known in history as the modern "rights revolution", which dates to at least to the Enlightenment, and is responsible in part for the birth of the country in which you live.
Individual freedom, bodily autonomy, etc. are inevitable outcomes of this logic; they don't need to be "promoted" or "espoused" by political parties; they just happen, when individuals are treated equally and fairly. Trying to oppose or roll them back is, in any modern context, the radical (though not progressive) move. And that way lies a conflict which will end with the common ruin of the contending parties, or else victory in for the march of individual rights. There is no history for conservative reaction. It must fail, or else society as we know it will fail.
I don’t see transgenderism, gay marriage, abortion at will, transition surgeries for minors, etc to be an inevitable advancement of progress human liberty. I think individual rights are gifts from God. The things we are obsessed about today are just childish bleating to get what we want, right now. We want to fill a hole inside us that politics can’t fill. That’s nothing g to do with liberty, and everything to do with license.
worthofweb.com now values LRC at $400,000.....down from $2,000,000 just 5 years ago.I know this isn't an exact science , BUT by using the same valuation system I think it can give you insight into trends over time.Letsrun val...
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
